Jono Jablonskio dėmesys stiliui

66 Languages and Culture | 83 REGINA KOŽENIAUSKIENĖ Vilniaus universitetas John JabloNsKi's DAME's STYLI INVAD In the posthumous work on Lithuanian language stylistics, Juozas Pikčilingis writes: “In searching for the answer to the question of from what to learn style, the eyes are first of all turned to the same sources on which Jonas Jablonskis relied.” (Pikčilingis 1971: 3). Here it should be added that the stylist’s eyes are not only directed to the same sources, but most importantly – to the writings of Jan Jablonski himself. And indeed, J. Pikčilingis’s stylistic works are full of J. Jablonskis’s quotations, examples, corrections, editing. Jablonski’s writings were a real school of practical stylistics for him: “As a stylist, I constantly have to look back at him and check whether I’m following that path...” (Marciano 2006: 23). J. Pikčilingis has repeatedly appreciated J. Jablonskis’ contribution to stylistics in conferences, television shows, radio programmes and interviews1. The last time honored with a commemorative article "let it revive, the conscience of the language" (Pikčilingis 1990: 5-6), dedicated to the 130th anniversary of the common language creator. In addition to J. Pikčilingis, Jonas Palionis (1959: 43–47), Arnoldas Piročkinas (1975: 4–11; 2000: 162–163) have written about J. Jablonski’s views on style, and vaida Knabikaitė (2006: 50–63) in the review part of the monograph “about the formation of Lithuanian linguistic stylistics”. However, the scope of J. Jablonski’s work is so large, and the research of stylists so fragmentary and episodic, that they still have quite a lot of work ahead of them. J. Jablonski’s attention to style is revealed in various aspects: 1) practical stylistics, i.e. style culture; 2) the relationship between logic of thought and style; 3) language ethics, and from it – ethical stylistics. Each of them could be material for a separate topic. On the other hand, the style of writing of Jablonski himself deserves attention, as he was an example for writers of the time – not only writers, but also journalists, translators, reviewers, textbook authors. Of the above-mentioned aspects, I will mention in the article only one more pronounced sign of the linguist’s attention to style. Pamė1 has said about this in an interview with J. Pikčilingis himself (see Marčiulionytė 1991: 23). r. KožENIausKIENĖ. 67 I will also describe the style of J. Jablonski himself (on this subject, apparently, nothing has been written yet). The logically balanced, laconic interpretations of J. Jablonski of one or another statement, the careful polemics with writers suggest that there are not only criteria of language correctness, logic, but also stylistics, general principles of style requirements. The norm-setter of the common language was concerned with the regularity, purity, accuracy, clarity, and fluidity, liveliness and conciseness of the language. all the characteristics of the language mentioned by J. Jablonski – fluent, clear, widely understood, decent, possible – are also the general characteristics of stylistic language. J. Jablonski’s attitude to stylistic corrections is evident from another note or broader commentary: “the correction of one sentence or word removed from the text, apart from the text itself, seems to have little value for the reader” (Jablr Iv 1935: 222); “In my written examples of speech there are many such words [...], which here, in spoken writing, are only used in the wrong place. The same words are used in speech” (Jablr Iv 1935: 328); “for this it would be necessary to know the dialects of all the people’s language best” (Jablr Iv 1935: 114). „an author who wants to be understood by the reader must know when writing his essay and for whom he is writing it. For people of little knowledge he must write as possible; When writing for a person with higher education, he can operuoti...“ (Jablr v 1936: 37). Šiuos komentarus galima suvokti kaip objektyviųjų stiliaus veiksnių aiškinimą, kai parenkant, vartojant ar siūlant and in more complex, sophisticated sentences certain language and stylistic means it is important to take into account the content of the entire text, its context and speaking situation, the area of use of language and the addressee, his age, education. For example, “If the author [Jonas Jablonskis] is reviewing a school textbook, of course, he often gives his opinion about its suitability and with regard to pedagogy...” (balčikonis 1935: vII). Moreover, J. Jablonskis acknowledges that the editor must understand the author’s idea well, it is important not to distort it when correcting the text. These observations are also relevant to the study of linguistic stylistics today. J. Pikčilingis began one of the broadest sections of the Lithuanian language stylistics “general stylistic language requirements” from the subsection “Language culture – thought culture”, i.e. from logical thinking, language clarity and accuracy as the basis of good style, essentially based on J. Jablonski’s corrections, quoting 68 Language Culture | 83 his critically-minded thoughts. Contemporaries who knew J. Jablonski emphasize his iron logic: “He paid particular attention to the development of logical reasoning in his pupils.” (Jokantas 1921: 541); "of course, his view was critical everywhere, because he was a man of great logic, who had seen and thought a lot." (smetona 1930: 44). Even in works of art, as J. Jablonskis used to say, in fairy tales, the logic of the content of the thought must be maintained, the images must be believable, not far from reality. Here it is worth remembering that he had graduated in classical philology and studied ancient rhetoric, which highlights one of the most important characteristics of text language – truth, justice (Latin veritas), realism (lot. veri similis). Having found incorrect writing about bees in the reading book, the linguist patiently explains that bees “do not fill “their own honeybees”, they do not pour anything “through their own tube” and do not give anything to their sisters!... Let us speak to the children directly, but let us speak in the textbook in such a way that they will understand us and that the teaching we give them will be healthy for them” (Jablr II 1933: 224). As can be seen from this example, the reviewer’s vigilance, logical thinking, and pursuit of truth are not disturbed by gentle deminutives (belly, tube, nurses). Having found in the same book the phrase “eagle makes its nest in oak trees”, J. Jablonskis notices two deviations in it and writes that it is by no means possible to say this in a school textbook, such birds do not make nests, but only “load or otherwise make nests; on the other hand, the eagle makes its nest only far away, on high rocks, where there are, it seems, not even oaks” (Jablr II 1933: 225). J. Pikčilingis, following the tradition of J. Jablonskis, writes: “before stylistically correcting a sentence, it must be checked according to the requirements of logical decision, because otherwise the whole stylistic “decoration” may remain meaningless” (Pikčilingis 1971: 36). of course, it is not appropriate to “artificially drag every statement on the shoe of logic [...]. The language does not always like excessive logification. Especially where it performs a function of emotional impact” (ibid., 42), i.e. in artistic works. In the editing of artistic texts, J. Jablonskis mainly corrected language errors caused by the influence of Slavic (Russian, Polish) languages. The linguist in several articles indicates the objective reasons for such errors. These words he applied to Vincas Krėvė-Mickevičius, Juozas Tumas-Vaižgantas, Faustas Kirša and other writers: Lithuanian writers R. KožENIausKIENĖ. Jan Jablonski’s attention to style 69 was due to the fact that they were distant from the language of their people, had studied in Russian schools, spoken and written in Russian or Polish, and were accustomed to expressing their thoughts with Russian literary sayings, places and Polish phraseology. Many of those who lived and worked in Russia for a long time, “gathered the opportunity to get rid of these strangeness” (Jablr Iv 1935: 335). By correcting a multitude of spelling, punctuation, grammar, lexical errors (individual lexical units and word combinations), the linguist also touched on language specificity, style issues, but did not specifically distinguish them. The peculiarities of the Lithuanian language, which are inseparable from the native language and the sense of style, are particularly clear when translating from a foreign language into one’s own: “A linguist could here draw his attention to the style of two of our writers, to see how much of this whole translation is expressed in words and sentences of our language” (Jablrr II 1959: 416), – writes J. Jablonskis about the translation of Petro vaičiūnas edited by Krėvė. In another review, writing about the translation of Skvortsov’s publication Nuostabūs antzdės gyvenimo atsitikimai by B. grigaitytė, J. Jablonskis lacks the liveliness of the language – that “the reader, having before him the ‘translation’, should feel at home, having to deal with a work dedicated simply to Lithuanian children, our people” (Jablrr II 1959: 241–242). He wanted to see a translation that “praised the master” (Jablrr II 1959: 292), so he patiently corrected all the irregularities in the translation and improved the style. He did not lose sight of the recipient of the translation. For example, he did not reproach international or dialectal words, but only said that one must be able to use them properly: “only where we cannot do without them” (Jablr Iv 1935: 144). “a translator may like or use certain words from her dialect, which are incomprehensible to many, but they should not be used in a translation for school: they will make the text more difficult to understand.” (Jablrr II 1959: 243). In another review he wrote similarly about the use of international words from a stylistic point of view – so that the sentences would be much clearer, more understandable, more lively, more humane for the student without those “angry marks”... J. Jablonskis criticized the major defect of translation texts – literal translation. The linguist taught to translate the thought, not the words, especially in phraseology. He himself translated various word combinations quite inventively, stylishly, in Lithuanian constructions. this can be deduced from his 1908 published Russian booklet M. bogdanov Social dwellings. Here are some examples: zabrošenna ja de re vuš ka – the smallest village; kruglyj god – full year; mucha-babucha – fly-snake; durak-durakom – like a whistle; važnoja lico – a large object; suščij vzdor – empty talk, etc. “In fact, those translations contained all the language science of J. Jablonski [...], 70 Languages Culture | 83 Translation of specific word combinations shows the translator’s ability to understand both the spirit of the foreign language and his own language. The literal translation is to be avoided here..." (vasiliauskaitė 1970: 154–155). even some now established phraseologies seemed to J. Jablonski to be correctable: break the hands: breaking the hands (= returning the hands) says... (Jablr Iv 1935: 327), get out of mind (= get out of the head) (Jabll 1985: 28, 29). In Krėvė Skirgaila he caught up with the phraseology turėti omenyje (= to have in mind, in sight): Ar tu galvoji tą vokietį? (Jablr Iv 1935: 327). Phraseologisms to break hands, to go crazy, to have in mind, although in fact they are translational, we find both in folklore and in the work of the best writers2. After all, foreign words in phraseologisms are usually not corrected, even words that are not quite understandable, and the syntax is not edited or incorrect. but J. Jablonski corrected such things as well. For example, as observed by A. Pirochkinas (2000: 153), in editing the phrase J. Jablonskis corrected the compound of the whole world merchant into the merchant of the whole world. phraseologisms and the text of the poem. Not even the teeth squeaked. There was one big black dolphin. Being accustomed to seeing how at least some work vibrates the waves of air and makes a voice, that voiceless floating on large wings, when even a fly, flying in the air, buzzes, increased the silence even more, raised the children's imagination even more into the ghost world, which begins here around the castle hill; through it one enters that cursed state where spirits lie motionless: alive or dead? Wherever you run, you don't know, with a goal or without a goal, with a live or dead foot mine; with dead wings, like the mourning ladybird, flying in the air. Not even the teeth squeaked. one black ladybird flew with big wings. that voiceless hovering of it – getting used to seeing, hearing, how at least some action vibrates the air wave and reveals the voice, like a fly, flying in the air, whistles – increased the ambiguity of silence even more, raised the children’s imagination even more into the ghost world, which begins here around the castle hill of the valiulis: through it one enters into that cursed state, where lie motionless, living or dead, spirits, wherever they run, but you do not know, with a purpose or without a purpose, with live or dead feet, mines the earth; live or dead wings, like the mourning ladybird, flying in the air. (Jablrr II 1959: 403) 2 For example, the Phraseological Dictionary (Fž 2001: 570) gives such examples of breaking hands (meaning "to grieve very much"): So do not break your hands, as birch branches that breaks the angry wind Mair. Only Zubrys alone was not silent, the white hands broke Krev. The young hammer breaks the white handles and sheds sweet tears alone. A young virgin cried the most as she walked through the garden, breaking her hands. The mother broke her hands, and the child is gone. r. KožENIausKIENĖ. 71 lionis, a. Piročkinas and v. Knabikaitė, therefore I present here an unanalysed excerpt of the poem. The individuality and Šioje vietoje būtų pravartu žvilgtelėti į J. Jablonskio mėginimą taisyti vaižganto tekstą. Keletą jo redaguotų vaižganto sakinių yra aptarę J. Paoriginality of this writer was acknowledged by J. Jablonskis himself: “he differs from others in his style” (Jablrr II 1959: 399). It is clear that even after J. Jablonski’s rather careful touches on the text, the anaphoric parallelisms of the vaižganto disappeared: nečirškė / teplaveno at the beginning of sentences, there were no more sweet dialectical teplaveno, plavenimas3. the choice of synonyms is also questionable. for example, the word vaižganto (flying) is softer, more poetic (when it refers to the world of light, flying, imagination-created ghosts), it is probably more appropriate than stylistically neutral skraido (flying). moreover, trisyllabic flying rhythmically closes the end of the whole paragraph better than bisyllabic flying. It is not appropriate to write about the “sorrow’s dragonfly” as a vowelless floating creature, because after the correction, the noisy alliteration of the r, r sounds (air flies) is now heard. Even corrected punctuation (which J. Jablonski paid the greatest attention to) changes the intonation of the phrase. For example, by changing the order of words (where lie still, alive or dead, spirits) and giving up the question mark, there is no more intriguing dilemma: where lie still spirits: alive or dead? what intrigues the reader the most, what takes his breath away (living or dead?), the vaižganto is completely measured to the end of the sentence, thus the reader’s curiosity is preserved for the longest, and the question mark is very necessary here, it is – “the symbol of doubts, various tortured considerations [...], meaningfulness, representation of mysterious thoughts” (abaravičius 2002: 168). In the edited text, the mystery of the vagabond’s conjecture, the credibility of the aesthetic narrative disappears. The lexicon, syntax, morphology, word order, spelling and punctuation were corrected, of course, not only for the sake of regularity – J. Jablonskis apparently sought greater clarity, fluidity and liveliness of thought. It was edited little and timidly, but, as this short excerpt of the poetic text shows, J. Jablonski’s correction changed the writer’s way of speaking. „style is the set of means of expression characteristic of the author and their repetition, it is a way of conveying thoughts and feelings, which arises from the selection of words, their use, the characteristics of joining into sentences.“ (Pikčilingis 1971a: 6). According to Jablonski himself, he did not like to interfere with the writer’s style: „the matter of style I tend to leave to the writers themselves, – 3 Cf. with J. balčikonis text: People thought that there was a swan with the wings of a swan (lKž X 118). 72 Language Culture | 83 The language of style itself matters” (Jablr v 1936: 72), but as we have seen, even the slightest change in word order changes the writer’s style. Here, it seems, even the plural limbs of the noun are unnecessarily corrected with live or dead feet, because there are no more colloquial style intonations: cf. There is no doubt that J. Jablonskis noticed a mistake in the text selection: wigais / gyvais, perhaps the word žemę [mina], added by the editor, is not yet in his mind, although the meaning is completely clear without it, so we can only agree with J. Palionis that “[...] by reworking and restyling individual sentences of the vaižgantian, he somewhat bleached the original “vaižgantian” style in places [...], and this rearrangement of those sentences (introduction of participle or participle genders, replacement of some words, etc.) somewhat modified the style of the vaižgantian himself: the restylised sentences are no longer so concise and expressive, no longer so “vaižgantian” (Palionis 1959: 46–47). Pirochkin’s opinion is similar: “Jablonsky was very careful in searching for stylistically adequate words for the desired purpose.” išreikšti minčiai, piešiamam vaizdui pakaitalų. tačiau ne visada jam tai pavyko padaryti [...]. apskritai reikėtų pasakyti, kad kiekvienas redaktoriaus (Piročkinas 2000: 162). The fact that J. Jablonskis was not always convinced about corrections to some literary texts (usually not original, but translations) is shown by the accompanying comments. Understanding how difficult it is to define the boundary between what is suitable and what is not, for example, regarding the corrections of Krėvė Skirgaila, he writes: “If the author or someone else really disagreed with some of my corrections to this place and wanted to publicly contend with me about them, I could apologize for those corrections or, if necessary, abandon them or go somewhere else and, perhaps, agree with my “opponent”.” II 1959: 312). However, we cannot in any way say that J. Jablonski did not contribute to the improvement of the writers' style. Even when they were offended, when they did not agree with the corrections, the writers were forced to discuss, to look for a more accurate, livelier, clearer Lithuanian word, Lithuanian syntactic construction, to think better, to look more closely at what and how to write. Jablonskis politely and tactfully reminded the writers to accept at least those corrections with which they agreed, and with his correct language and impeccable style, he undoubtedly disciplined the writers who liked too much freedom, writing “without any constraints”. In the words of the linguist, licentia poetica (Jablr Iv 1935: 304) cannot replace the rules of language even in poetry: r. KožENIausKIENĖ. 73 "I advise the translator to take his own language seriously at last: without language there is no literature..." (Jablr Iv 1935: 305). In the Educational Work (1924, No. 12), speaking about the not particularly successful translation of Faust Kirša (J. I. Krasevski’s Vitolio’s Cry), J. Jablonskis draws a rhetorical analogy worthy of a stylist’s pen: “when I finish my review, I ask the translator: how would he look at the work of a painter from which it is evident that this painter is not understood and is not concerned about the meaning of colors in painting, about the tapestry material, gender (form)?” (Jablr Iv 1935: 305). The language of the newspapers of that time was, it could be said, completely weak, full of foreign words, translational literal syntactic constructions, clumsy statements. J. Jablonski was primarily concerned with correcting errors in logic, spelling, punctuation and grammar, and he also mentions translations of phraseologisms brought from Russia: Štai faktas ant veido (Jablr II 1933: 364); ask him a question with a rib (there); He is not alone, he is not alone (1963) 3. The linguist wrote about the language of the daily newspaper Lietuvos žinios: “It seems to me that we should take care that the writers of one newspaper use the same language as everyone else, so that they only differ in style from each other.” (Jablr Iv 1935: 181). Thus he acknowledged not only the diversity of the styles of the writers, but also of the journalists, but noted the shortcomings of the style, because he wanted the language of the newspapers to be “more uniform, more beautiful, more regular” (Jablr Iv 1935: 187), so that “the newspapers and writers […] would make use of these observations, k u r s u j a i s s u t i n k a, for the future” (Jablr Iv 1935: 182). J. Jablonski’s comments and remarks about the shortcomings of the style of the newspapers are quite accurate: “In the newspaper, meanwhile, [...] c) such quite long sentences, which, among other things, are expressed in too high, not quite good, not quite regular style (X, 1 and 2). This kind of “errors” will not be understood by a poor man, and this must be the first concern of the writer; it's not easy to fix." (Jablr Iv 1935: 181). in short sentences mainly corrected language errors, unclear statements. For example, such illogical sentences: Thanks to the conditions of policy, many teachers had to quit teaching; The Teachers' Congress closed, J. Jablonskis corrected, as he liked to say, human language: About politics 74 Language Culture | 83 circumstances, conditions many teachers had to quit teaching; The Teachers' Congress closed, ended (Jablr Iv 1935: 177). It seems that only the language has been corrected, the style matters have not yet been addressed, but for each inappropriate word J. Jablonskis offers at least two correct equivalents (circumstances and conditions; closed and ended), from which the author can choose the more accurate, more appropriate one. found in longer newspaper sentences, in addition to language issues, the style is corrected: Sentences of Lithuanian knowledge edited sentences 1. What do we see today? or not-1. What do we see today? isn't the straightening of the shoulders overly not the struggle for rights and sim? or not a fight for rights and a firm with one giant’s wing swept across the Atlantic Ocean, with the second giant’s constantly, without respite, running (Jablr Iv 1935: 177). constantly rising, their meaning is unclear. The first sentence, edited by J. Jablonski, has become forms at the end of rhetorical questions: straightening / defending. in the words – constantly, without respite, unceasingly, and instead of the completely J. Jablonskis himself had some doubts about this correction, secondly, perhaps bent after the burden of work overly tired of the shoulders stretched out? or standing with those already won? Winning the defense? 2. we have an organism, wing – in the East unceasingly rusing, with the second giant’s wing – in the East sketching (?). The newspaper author's sentences are incorrect, and therefore smoother due to the corrected word order and the consonance of grammatical second sentence, instead of unceasingly, he gave a few correct synonymous vague word “running” – raising, sketching (?). The question mark indicates that he left room for the author’s choice. The linguist usually only suggested, in his opinion, a more correct, better word, presented a few of them and tolerantly admitted that he had not yet exhausted all the riches of language and style: “These thoughts can, of course, be expressed in another way; it is only necessary to always take care that the rules of its people's language are dictated." (Jablrr II 1959: 210). John Jablonski’s corrections were a great stimulus for the press workers of the time, and his personal example was no less influential: he was not only a newspaper editor, but also an active writer of articles and reviews in a distinctively refined style. “How will the co-workers learn to write humanely for the newspaper, if the newspaper in its language, with all its work arrangements, does not give them a good example?” (Jablr Iv 1935: 186). r. KožENIausKIENĖ. When editing the original or translated works of writers, J. Jablonskis was particularly sensitive to the issues of stylistics, saying that they were not entirely clear to him himself, acknowledging the right of writers to style diversity. Even if they disagreed with some of the amendments, the writers had to debate, polemise, seek the truth, better think about what and how to write. Jablonski’s constant attention to the language and style of writers (literacy, newspapers, textbooks) gave good results: Lithuanian language became more uniform, regular, lively, lighter. From the point of view of contemporary functional styles, it is possible to say that his articles on language issues are written in a popular scientific style, clearly, objectively, tactfully. The linguist was able to react to the accusations of his opponents in a restrained, sober, logical and reasoned manner. Articles on social, cultural and educational issues, mostly for newspapers, J. Jablonskis wrote in a journalistic style, which combines his characteristic intellectual language with restrained expressive stylistic means. The examples discussed show that Jonas Jablonskis was well versed not only in language but also in stylistics. With corrections and interpretations of language and style, the ability to write correctly, logically and clearly, with a smooth, easy and convincing style, the linguist drew others by his living example. In summary, it can be said that the attention of Janas Jablonskis to style, manifested in various aspects, influenced both writers and stylistic researchers, especially benefited practical stylistics. ŠaltINIaI Fž 2001: Frazeologijos žodynas, vilnius: lietuvių kalbos institutas. Jablr I 1932: Jablonskio raštai 1, Kaunas: Švietimo ministerijos leidinys. Jablr II 1933: Jablonskio raštai 2, Kaunas: Švietimo ministerijos leidinys. Jablr Iv 1935: Jablonskio raštai 4, Kaunas: Švietimo ministerijos leidinys. Jablr v 1936: Jablonskio raštai 5, Kaunas: Švietimo ministerijos leidinys. Jablrr II 1959: J. Jablonskis. Rinktiniai raštai 2, vilnius: valstybinė politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla. Jabll 1985: Jono Jablonskio laiškai, vilnius: Mokslas. lItEratūra a b a r avi č i u s J. 2002: Skyrybos stilistika, vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. b a l č i ko n i s J. 1932: Prakalba. – Jablonskio raštai 1, vII–XXvIII. 82 Kalbos Kultūra | 83 b a l č i ko n i s J. 1935: Prakalba. – Jablonskio raštai 4, vII–vIII. g u s t a i t i s M. 1923: Stilistika. vadovėlis literatūros teorijai, Marijampolė. Jo k a n t a s K. 1921: Jablonskis Mintaujoj, revely, Pskove. – Lietuvos mokykla 12, 540–543. Knabikaitė v. 2006: Lingvistinės lietuvių stilistikos raida XX amžiuje, vilnius: Mintis. l u k ė n a i t ė - g r i c i u v i e n ė E. 2009: Konstancijos ir Jono Jablonskių šeima, lietuvos nacionalinis muziejus. M a r č i u l i o ny t ė I. 1991: „žodis – tai pilis gimtojoj žemėj“ (interviu su J. Pik čilingiu). – Gimtoji kalba 3, 23–25. Pa l i o n i s J. 1959: J. Jablonskio kalbiniai taisymai. – J. Jablonskis. Rinktiniai raštai 2, 43–47. P i k č i l i n g i s J. 1971: Lietuvių kalbos stilistika 1, vilnius: Mintis. P i k č i l i n g i s J. 1971a: Kas yra stilius, vilnius: Mintis. P i k č i l i n g i s J. 1975: Lietuvių kalbos stilistika 2, vilnius: Mintis. P i k č i l i n g i s J. 1990: teatgyja ji, kalbos sąžinė. – Mūsų žodis 2, 5–6. P i r o č k i n a s a. 1975: Jablonskis ir kalbos stiliai. – Mūsų kalba 6, 4–11. Piročkinas a. 1978: J. Jablonskis – bendrinės kalbos puoselėtojas, vilnius: Mokslas. P i r o č k i n a s a. 1986: Jono Jablonskio kalbos taisymai, Kaunas: Šviesa. P i r o č k i n a s a. 2000: Jonas Jablonskis redaguoja vaižgantą. – Archivum Lithuanicum 2, 162–163. s m e t o n a a. 1930: atsiminimų bruožai. – Kalba 1(2), 37–44. va s i l i a u s k a i t ė s. 1970: J. Jablonskis – frazeologinių junginių vertėjas. – Pergalė 3, 154–157. ž u p e r k a K. 2005: tekstas etinės stilistikos požiūriu. – Žmogus ir žodis 7(1), 28. gauta 2010 10 29 r. KožENIausKIENĖ. Jono Jablonskio dėmesys stiliui 83 JoNas JabloNsKIs’ CoNCErN about tHE laNguagE stYlE Summary When editing literary texts of other writers, Jonas Jablonskis gave a particular attention to stylistics matters. although he admitted that certain stylistic issues remained unclear to him, he did recognize the writers’ right to stylistic variation. J. Jablonskis’ constant attention to the written word of writers, newspaper reporters, textbook authors yielded good results: the lithuanian language was becoming more standardized, correct and expressive. From the modern perspective of functional styles, the style of J. Jablonskis could be described as popular science writing—his articles on language are written in clear, objective and non-biased language. His responses to oponents are moderate, sensible, logical and argumentative. J. Jablonskis’ articles on social, cultural and educational issues (mostly for the newspapers) are written in the publicistic style which combines the intellectual discourse with moderately expressive stylistic means. some of his texts are written in witty humourous style which denies the opinion that he was a conservative and dogmatic grammarian insensitive to stylistic subtlety. It is possible to conclude that the distinctive features of Jonas Jablonskis’ style are an exceptionally correct usage of lithuanian, transparent and logical expression of ideas as well as easiness in writing and ability to formulate ideas in fluently flowing syntactical periods, showing his fondness for rhetorical questions that focus the reader’s attention and encourage him to think. rEgINa KožENIausKIENĖ Vilniaus universitetas universiteto g. 3, lt-01513 vilnius Regina. K[email protected]